Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T04:30:57.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dostoevskij and the Soviet Critics 1947–1948

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2017

John C. Fiske
John C. Fiske*
Affiliation:
Russian Research Center, Harvard University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Cultural Tightening of the screws which has been going on in Russia since the end of the war received its most dramatic expression in the condemnation of the Leningrad writers in August, 1946, and has since extended itself to other fields of culture, notably philosophy, economics, music, biology and physics. In the field of literary criticism, a minor storm arose over the head of Dostoevski], battering many unfortunates who were engaged in the game of trying to fit this large and complex literary figure in among the spiritual ancestors of the Revolution.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Slavic and East European Review , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , February 1950 , pp. 42 - 56
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies 1950

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Kirpotin, V. Ja., Molodoj Dostoevskij (Moscow, 1947).Google Scholar

2 Kirpotin, V. Ja., F. M. Dostoevskij (Moscow, 1947).Google Scholar

3 Dolinin, A. S. (Iskoz, A. S.), V tvorčeskoj laboratorii Dostoevskogo (Moscow, 1947).Google Scholar

4 Tomaševskij, B. V., ed., F. M. Dostoevskij, sočinenie (Moscow, 1946).Google Scholar

5 Kirpotin had taken part in a discussion of Veselovskij in the pages of Oktjabr' (December 1948-January 1949). Although he attacked other “apologists,” his critics state that he “hastily retreated” from his attack, admitting certain “scientific services“ of Veselovskij and forgetting, apparently, that “the bourgeois liberal was first among the enemies of social-revolutionary ideas of the nineteenth century.” See article “Protiv buržuaznogo liberalizma v literaturovedenii” in Kul'tura i Žizn’ March 11, 1948.

6 Dolinin, A. S., ed., Pis'ma Dostoevskogo (Moscow-Leningrad, 1928–34).Google Scholar

7 Dolinin, A. S., F. M. Dostoevskij, materiali i issledovanija (Leningrad, 1936).Google Scholar

8 Dostoevskij, F. M., Polnot sobranie khudozestvennykh proiŽvedeni. (Moscow-Leningrad, 1926–30) (13 vols.).Google Scholar

9 A. Uralov, “Pravda o Dostoevskom,” Literaturnaja Gazeta, November 26, 1947.

10 See note 7.

11 Pereverzev, V., Tvorčestvo Dostoevskogo (1st ed.; Moscow, 1922; 3d ed. in 1928).Google Scholar

12 Pereverzev, V., “Dostoevskij, Fëdor Mikhajlovič,” Literaturnaja Enciklopedija, Vol. III (Moscow-Leningrad, 1930).Google Scholar

13 An interesting study of criticism of Dostoevskij through the twenties and thirties is the essay “Dostoevski in Soviet Russia,” by E. J. Simmons in The American Quarterly on the Soviet Union, July, 1938, and the footnotes refer to several useful biographies covering that period. The Pereverzev affair is here further elaborated.

14 G. Gorbačev, “Raskol v pereverzevcakh,” Krasnaja Nov', March, 1930. Gorbačev was also a Dostoevskij scholar in his own right, and author of a not entirely unfriendly introduction to the Letters (see note 6).

15 “Doklad A. M. Gor'kogo o sovetskoj literature,” Pervyj vsesojuznyj s'ezd sovetskykh fisatelej (Moscow, 1934) (Stenographic report), p. 11. In this speech he reaffirmed the views on Dostoevskij which he had expressed in articles dating back as far as 1905.

16 Ibid.

17 N. I. Ignatova and E. N. Konšina edited the notes for The Possessed under the title Zapisnye Tetrady F. M. Dostoevskogo (Leningrad, 1935). An introduction by Ignatova states that The Possessed is “one of the most powerful and significant novels of the nineteenth century.” In a copy of this book procured in Moscow within the last three years, the name of Ignatova has been erased and much of the introduction—not including the above quotation—has been removed.

18 Dostoevsky, F. M., The Idiot (Constance Garnett, trans.) (New York, 1935), p. 520.Google Scholar

19 Dostoevsky, F. M., The Possessed (Constance Garnett, trans.) (New York, 1936), p. 250.Google Scholar

20 Dostoevsky, F. M., “Notes from Underground” in Short Novels of Dostoevsky (Constance Garnett, trans.) (New York, 1945), p. 149.Google Scholar

21 V. V. Ermilov, born in 1904, came to prominence as a critic as early as 1927. One of the strict ideological group of Na Literaturnom Postu, he became, after 1934, an enthusiastic exploiter of some of Gor'kij's literary dicta.

22 Ermilov, V. V., “Gor'kij i Dostoevskij,” Krasnaja Nov', 1939, No. 4, pp. 5–6.Google Scholar

23 V. V. Ermilov, “Velikij Russkij Pisatel’ F. M. Dostoevskij,” Literatura i iskusstvo. May 9, 1942.

24 Ermilov even hinted here that such a character as Pëtr Verkhovenskij was a prototype, not of a Marxist revolutionary, but rather of a Nazi. Dostoevskij's attitude toward Germans and German thought was much stressed during the war years.

25 L. Dmitrev, in Literatura i iskusstvo, December 4, 1943.

26 Dostoevski, F. M.), Bednye ljudi (Moscow, 1946)Google Scholar; Unaëmnye i oskorblennye (Moscow, 1946); Podrostok (Moscow-Leningrad, 1947).

27 Kirpotin, V. Ja., “ ‘Bednye ljudi'—pervyj roman F. M. Dostoevskogo,” Oktjabr', 1946, No. 1–2.Google Scholar

28 See note 1.

29 D. Zaslavskij, “O Dostoevskom” Literaturnaja GazeU, November 16, 1946.

30 See note 4.

31 B. L. Koten, “Data on Soviet Literature Published in USSR, 1917–1947,” American Review on the Soviet Union, March, 1948.

32 A. S. Dolinin, V tvorčeskoj …., p. 7.

33 See note 7.

34 V. Ja. Kirpotin, F. M. Dostoevskij …, p. 23.

35 Ibid. p. 36.

36 F. Evnin, “Novaja kniga o Dostoevskom,” Novyj Mir, October, 1947.

37 See note 8.

38 D. Zaslavskij, “Protiv idealizacii reakcionnykh vzgljadov Dostoevskogo,” Kultura i Žzri', December 20, 1947.

39 V. V. Ermilov, “F. M. Dostoevskij i naši kritiki,” Literaturnaja Gazeta, December 24, 1947.

40 I have been unable to find the articles Ermilov is here referring to.

41 A. S. Dolinin, V tvorčeskoj …, p. 10.

42 Simmons, E. J., Dostoevski; The Making of a Novelist (New York-London, 1940), p. 286.Google Scholar

43 V. V. Ermilov, Protiv reakcionnykh idej v tvorčestve F. M. Dostoevskogo. Vsesojuznogo obščestvo po rasprostraneniju političeskogo i naucnogo znanij. (Moscow, 1948).

44 “Ulučšit’ rabotu izdatel'stva ‘sovetskij pisatel'', “ Kultura i Žizn’ January 11, 1948.

45 B. V. Tomasevškij, op. c'tt.

46 Slonimskij, A. L., F. M. Dostoevskij, “Mal'čiki” (Moscow, 1947).Google Scholar

47 N. Burov, “Apologety reakcionnykh idej Dostoevskogo,” Litcraturnaja Gazeta, January 3, 1948.

48 This is not intended to imply that the matter has been entirely dropped since early 1948. Among the repercussions of the original attack is Dolinin's recantation, published in Literaturnaja Gazeta on November 13, 1948, in an article concerning an April meeting at Leningrad University. After acknowledging his errors, Dolinin declares his intention of turning to a study of Belinskij, Gerzen and other revolutionary democrats. A generalized self-criticism, with a condemnation of “cosmopolitanism,” by Tomasevškij appears in the same article, which is entitled: “Bol'ševistskaja partijnost'—osnova sovetskogo literaturnovedenija.” An article by B. Bjalik in Soviet Literature, 1948, No. 1 o, under the title: “Gorky and Dostoyevsky” does little more than reiterate the views of Zaslavskij and Ermilov.